Yeah, I know it's a flawed film, I mean, I caught it one night, LATE at night, on cable TV when I was a kid. HBO to be specific and at an hour reserved for only failed and low quality films. In other words, I found it at a place where movies go to die. The equivalent of the bargain box at a toy store. But, I liked it. It wasn't the usual thriller and that's saying a lot given that thrillers, like action movies, all have relatively the same plot. They tend to be like the Harley Davidson store crowd as in they all dress the same and claim they are rebels. Cat Chaser was something different. The plot stood out. Peter Weller did as best a job he could. The cast did as best a job as they could. It was just, the director didn't really know what to do with the script, which was, I learned, (thank you IMDB) based on an Elmore Leonard novel...and that sort of says it all. The writer, Elmore Leonard, isn't exactly a literary great. He has an irritating vernacular. BUT, he also has a talent for creating unique characters and unique settings and situations and stringing them all together into a coherent plot. Leonard is a pulp writer, but he was a pulp writer that was original in his approach to just about everything and his stories are a pleasure to read. And, when, like this one, they are adapted to the big screen, that uniqueness carries over. Even in a bad film, as this one was--albeit a bad film with good acting--it becomes a story that you haven't really encountered before and you won't encounter again. So give it a watch, it's Elmore Leonard, you aren't seeing a great film, but you are going to see a story you haven't encountered before, and to me, that alone is worth 10 out of 10 stars. Don't rate it on it's cinematic prowess, watch it for the plot, it's new, it's original, and, even if its badly done, we need a lot more of that, especially now, when almost everything we see is exactly like almost everything else we are seeing.

Go to full review